Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Wannon proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

This Government's mismanagement of the immigration portfolio.

I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members of this House might remember that on 22 August two questions were asked of the Prime Minister. They were put to him in very clear terms. They went to the heart of the issue that we've been asking questions about today. The question was: Prime Minister, does supporting Hamas pass the character test for an Australian visa? Sadly, on 22 August he was asked that question twice but refused to answer, and now we know why. He didn't want to answer that question, because he knew that what the government had done, in issuing tourist visas for those fleeing the Gaza war zone, was rushed, botched and put Australia's national security at risk. And what have we found out today? That that is exactly what has happened. A visa has been granted to Fayez Elhasani, an individual openly linked to listed terrorist organisations Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

The biggest concern that we've seen today is: now that this has come to light, what guarantees have been given from those opposite that this individual will be booted from the country? None. Do you think the Prime Minister, who wouldn't come to the dispatch box and answer one question asked of him today, would give a guarantee that he would make sure that this individual was removed from this country today? No, he would not. Do you think the new Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs would give such a guarantee? No, he would not—nothing of the kind.

Let's remember what happened. We saw tourist visas issued to these individuals fleeing the Gaza war zone. At least 1,300 people have arrived in this country on those tourist visas. We raised serious questions at the time about whether the proper security checks had been put in place. I'm sure all members on our side remember when we asked those questions. They remember that the Prime Minister verballed the Director-General of Security of ASIO. Do you think that the Prime Minister came in, apologised for doing that and corrected the record? No, he did not. Yet here we are now, where they are now saying, 'Oh, we are just hiding behind the Director-General of Security of ASIO.'

When are we going to see leadership from this Prime Minister on any issue? When are we going to see leadership from the Prime Minister, in particular on his No. 1 responsibility, keeping the Australian people safe? Once again, he refused to front up to the dispatch box today and answer important questions that the Australian people want answered. Not only that; he cut question time short. It didn't even go for an hour. I cannot remember the last time question time was cut short to less than an hour. The reason why he wanted to cut it short was that he didn't want to answer any more questions on this issue. Sadly, it's true. He is running scared.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party, Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Running away!

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He is not only running scared; as the shadow Treasurer says, he's running away. That is despicable. That is a disgrace because the No. 1 responsibility of any prime minister is to keep the Australian community safe.

What is even more deeply concerning about the revelations that we've seen today in the Daily Telegraph is the fact that we know that a large number of those people who came from the Gaza war zone on tourist visas have now claimed asylum. So, my view—and it's one that wasn't repudiated by the immigration minister, and of course we didn't even hear from the Prime Minister—is that they are deeply concerned that this individual, or other individuals potentially linked to Hamas, have claimed protection. How much more can you botch immigration and national security in this nation? We've got a new minister, but it's the same old story: immigration is a complete and utter mess under this government.

An opposition member: Surely not!

Yes, you would think, 'Surely not!' You would think, surely the government is putting in place measures to stop this happening. But I don't know whether we remember—because with everything they've botched, so much has happened that it's hard to keep up with it—how we rushed into this place because there was legislation that was going to help address NZYQ and the cascading effects. It was important legislation—legislation that required passage that day. That went to the Senate. What do you think has happened to it? Has it seen the light of day since? No, it hasn't. It has been pulled. It's sitting somewhere up there in the Senate—this great urgency, and we cannot see the government even now putting it on the Notice Paper. Such was the urgency that was required for that piece of legislation. It is a farce. You couldn't make this stuff up.

Then, of course—and I'm going to run out of time, and it's such a shame, because the list is so long—there is what is happening with the issuing of visas. Net overseas migration has gone to over a million in two years under this government—in a housing and rental crisis. And the issuing of visas continues apace. There is no way known that this government is going to be able to meet any of its net overseas migration targets. As a matter of fact, the Treasurer on a Friday afternoon quietly admitted that he wasn't going to be able to do it.

Everywhere you look, when it comes to this government, national security and immigration is a complete and utter mess. Not only that but, as we have seen in this place today, you are putting the security of the Australian people at risk because you have botched it so badly.

Patrick Gorman (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Not even an hour ago here in the chamber we acknowledged former Liberal Premier Peter Gutwein, who had walked from Tasmania to Canberra to share an important message on behalf of the Migrant Resource Centre of Tasmania about being an inclusive, respectful country—a country where we recognise the great contribution of migration.

Former premier Gutwein said:

Australians from a migrant and refugee background contribute to every sector of the economy and community, and by sharing positive stories, we can build a deeper understanding that as Australians—regardless of colour, race, circumstance or background—we are simply, better together.

I, too, share a commitment to a strong, multicultural Australia where we benefit from all of the talents, insights and experiences of those who have chosen to make that country their home. Almost all in this place go to citizenship ceremonies, welcoming people from across the globe. It is what has made us an economic powerhouse. That was outlined in the Parkinson report, with the former secretary of Treasury noting the huge economic contribution migration has made. While there are large differences in views across this chamber about how that system should be managed, I want to note at the start of this important debate just how important migration is to Australia and how proud we should be of being a welcoming, multicultural nation.

I think it's why so many who rely on our migration system get so angry when they see just what a mess was created under the former government, just how inefficiently government resources—public resources—were being used and just how rorted our migration system had become. You only need to look at the headlines of what was said about the migration system when those opposite were in control. You had international investigations and a report in the Sydney Morning Herald which said, 'Crime ring trafficked women like cattle.' It reported on a global human trafficking syndicate that exploited flaws in Australia's border security system to enable a national illegal sex trafficking scheme in Australia. Under the watchful eye of the Leader of the Opposition, you saw reports of rogue agents offering fake visas for $500 a month. This was just happening. The government at the time apparently knew nothing about it, but maybe some of the cuts they made had a little bit of an impact there. You saw reports of repulsive abuses of human rights within a human trafficking system happening under the former government.

It wasn't just human exploitation happening at mass scale under those opposite; you also saw the migration system being completely rorted through close, personal relationships with Liberal ministers. You have one story where the headline is, 'The migration agent and the Liberal ministers: How one man gamed Australia's system.' He went to dinner after dinner and fundraiser after fundraiser, boasting of cosy meals with coalition ministers and donating more than $25,000 to the campaign of the former Liberal Assistant Minister for Home Affairs. That is what we had under those opposite. It goes on. We had the Albanian mafia infiltrating our visa system. One report in the Sydney Morning Herald about the system run under those opposite said:

Violent crime syndicates run by Albanian immigrants on temporary visas have so successfully exploited holes in the country's border security and migration system they are now challenging bikie gangs for control of Australia's lucrative cocaine market.

Again, that happened under those opposite.

We just had a speech from the shadow minister, the member for Wannon, talking about the release of individuals and the granting of visas. I want to note the Leader of the Opposition's record, which he proudly tells us about. We heard earlier that he was proud of his record as the former Minister for Health, which gave even some on that side a chuckle. But he also says he's proud of his time as the minister in charge of the Department of Home Affairs, when he released not 100—not 200, not 500—but 1,300 criminals from immigration detention. That included two men who had been convicted of being accessories to murder. The now Leader of the Opposition released 102 convicted sex offenders, among those 64 child sex offenders. There were 1,300 criminals released by the Leader of the Opposition on his watch. Those are decisions he and his delegates made.

Let's give a bit of flavour to the sort of people we're talking about, who were released by the Leader of the Opposition. We have one individual, born in the United Kingdom in 1947, who was convicted in 2016 of being an accessory to the stabbing murder of an associate of an illegal drug ring. He helped another man carry the victim's body to the boot of a car and dump it in a makeshift grave. He was released by the Leader of the Opposition. Another, born in the United Kingdom in 1945, was convicted in 1986 of being an accessory to murder when a drug associate shot another man in what was described as a gangland execution. Again, that individual was released by the Leader of the Opposition. And the standard the Leader of the Opposition set when he released these 1,300 criminals was that there was no electronic monitoring—not on a single one of them. Of the 1,300 criminals released by Leader of the Opposition, not a single one had electronic monitoring. There were no curfews and no other conditions. And there was no Australian Border Force or AFP operation to monitor them. We know that the Leader of the Opposition doesn't like being questioned about releasing these individuals.

We have been and continue to be a country that welcomes people who are fleeing war zones, fleeing conflict, and coming to safe havens such as Australia. I note that those opposite were strong supporters of that when 1,991 individuals from Afghanistan—at that point controlled by the Taliban—came here on visas. They also welcomed 4,994 individuals from Iraq and 1,505 people from Syria, with large parts of Iraq and Syria being controlled by Islamic State at the time. They were welcoming those individuals in because, again, Australia and our security agencies find a way to give people safe haven in times of crisis, something we should be incredibly proud of as Australians.

I did think it was interesting that the shadow minister for immigration, who put this MPI forward, was telling us about how he would like to clamp down on immigration. A colleague pointed out a very interesting piece to me. Just before the former government went into caretaker mode prior to the 2022 election, one of the last acts, one of the last announcements, by the member for Wannon as the minister for trade and tourism was to ensure a new visa pathway for Indian yoga teachers. He was so proud of the new visa pathway for up to a thousand yoga teachers that he put out a press release. They were the sorts of priorities they had. While he was out there putting out press releases about all the great visas he was providing, we had the absolutely broken system sitting beyond that. Maybe he should have spent a little less time on his media releases and a little bit more time on actually fixing the migration system.

The Parkinson report tells us just how broken it was—a '10-year rebuild'. This is not something you could do quickly, because it was so badly broken. It was a deliberate decision under those opposite to neglect the system. Then we get to the rorted visa system. We had the review by Christine Nixon, which noted that the visa system under the now Leader of the Opposition paved the way for foreign organised crime syndicates, including the Albanian mafia, to infiltrate the country and engage in illicit activities, including but not limited to drug trafficking, money laundering, violence, modern slavery, sexual exploitation and corruption. That's what happened on their watch.

Then there was the absolute mess when it came to offshore processing contracts, which required the Richardson review. That review noted that, again, under the now Leader of the Opposition, when he was the minister in charge of that department, there was a lack of proper due diligence. Individuals and businesses were suspected of seeking to circumvent US sanctions against Iran. We saw money laundering, bribery, drugs and arms smuggling into Australia, and, again, corruption—under those opposite.

I would hope that by the end of this MPI we'd have some clarity on whether those opposite take any responsibility for the mess they left, any responsibility for any of the 1,300 criminals that the now Leader of the Opposition released and any responsibility for any single thing that happened in any portfolio when you were in office.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll start with a three 'I's that I was talking to my colleagues about this morning, the three 'I's that will bring down the Labor government—they really will. The first one is intermittent power. Intermittent power underpins the cost-of-living crisis, with electricity prices going through the roof. Food prices and the grocery prices they're attached to are going through the roof. Manufacturing jobs—if the grand plan of the Labor Party was so evident, manufacturers such as Boeing, Rolls-Royce, BMW, Mitsubishi and Hitachi would say, 'This gentleman who sits over here, Mr Bowen, is a genius, and we should all get to Australia in a big hurry to be part of this new nirvana.' Of course, no-one wants to come here. In fact, they're all lined up to go.

Then, of course, there's immigration—I'll come back to that. The third 'I' is the incumbent. Tick-tock, tick-tock, we can hear the clock. We've got Cameron Milner winding it up, so it gets to the alarm clock even quicker. This man, Cameron Milner, is writing some marvellous pieces in the paper. I bet they're not solo efforts; I bet they're thought out in a tactics group. The Prime Minister is rattled. He's like a man who has dived out of a plane and the first parachute didn't work, and he's desperately searching for the second one. Today, the second parachute was the NBN sale. Where did this come from? Why don't we have a motion that we're not going to sell Uluru or the beaches? I don't know.

Back to immigration, because it underpins so much. We've seen from Abul Rizvi, who was the deputy secretary of the immigration department, that between 450,000 and 475,000 people are going to move to Australia, or have moved to Australia, in the 2023-24 year. That's twice the size of Hobart, the size of Canberra, six Tamworths or 1½ Geelongs. So it's not just the people. Where are the dams that will support these people? Where are the roads to support these people? Where are the schools that you would expect to find in two Hobarts or in a Canberra?

Look at what Canberra has: two universities, parks and houses. Have we built a Canberra in the last 12 months? Have we built the universities? This goes through to the hospitals, the TAFEs and the police. You're spreading the police so thin because you just haven't got the infrastructure there. The doctors—I know the member for Mallee understands medical issues so much, with her husband, Phil, who does a great job in that part of the world. This is all part and parcel of what we're getting with this chaotic approach. I truly believe that the three 'I's—intermittent power, immigration and the incumbent—are so detrimental to the current government. There is a gentleman on the other side, the Treasurer, and I don't think he's fully in support of the current incumbent. I think he's sitting out there, waiting in the wings.

To close on one final thing, in my area—as with the member for Riverina—we have the Ezidi community. Immigration doesn't mean no immigration; it means selective immigration. Recently, in Gaza, one lady—one young girl—was liberated. She had been abducted as a young girl 10 years ago in the war by ISIS, and she's appeared in Gaza. She has been a sex slave for over 10 years. We should be aware of this. These people need our help. I share this story just to give people an understanding. On the most serious note, one Ezidi lady and her child were taken to Syria by ISIS. The child wouldn't stop screaming because the child was hungry, and so was she. ISIS said to her, 'You must stop that child screaming.' She said: 'I can't. We're both hungry.' So they took the child from her. Later on, they gave her something to eat and then they asked her if she still felt hungry. She said, 'No, thank you.' They said, 'Well, you've just eaten your child.'

This is the barbarity of how the Ezidi people have been treated. As a compassionate nation, we must retain our capacity to let these people, as genuine refugees, come to this nation. I call for the government to clearly understand the plight of the Ezidi people.

Peter Khalil (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm actually quite flabbergasted that the opposition would have the audacity to put up an MPI that talks about mismanagement of the immigration system. All they really need to do is look back at the nine years they were in government to see clearly the classic template of mismanagement and incompetence. I think what they're doing here is classic projection. They are projecting. They're trying to deflect from the fact that their track record over nine years in government was the exact essence of mismanagement.

They've got an impressive capacity to be in denial and deflect, and we've heard from previous speakers what sounds almost like a rap sheet of mismanagement. There's the fact that, when they were in government and Peter Dutton, the Leader of the Opposition, was the minister, they released some 1,300 criminals from immigration detention. We've heard about the two men convicted of being accessories to murder and the 102 convicted sex offenders that were released, 64 of which were child sex offenders. They did this without any electronic monitoring, without any curfews or conditions and without any Australian Border Force or Australian Federal Police operations to monitor those persons that were released. Of course there was a man who was released from detention in early 2020 who then went on to be one of the three men who assaulted Ninette Simons in her home in Perth in April last year.

So, clearly, there is this legacy of mismanagement. But what they also did is they starved the Department of Home Affairs of the resources necessary for the proper functioning of the immigration system. Under their watch, there was an almost 50 per cent reduction in the number of compliance officers employed there. What impact do we think that's going to have? The Nixon review showed a rampant lack of integrity in our migration system that went unchecked for years under the previous government and for six years under the Leader of the Opposition while he was responsible as minister for immigration and for home affairs. For nearly a decade we witnessed not just mismanagement. It was more than the mismanagement they have in the title of this MPI. It was also negligence, neglect, underinvestment and, of course, incompetence by that former government.

As well as all of those things, there was also the politicisation of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal appointments. The largest division of the AAT is the Migration and Refugee Division. By the end of last year this division had—wait for it—more than 54,000 cases on hand. They built up this backlog while they were in government. They appointed 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates, former Liberal staffers and other close Liberal associates onto the AAT without any merit based selection process. These were individuals with no relevant experience or expertise, and that fatally compromised that system. They left behind a shameful backlog of people who had been waiting for years and years for decisions and who were handed incorrectly determined and undercooked decisions they had to appeal through the lengthy and expensive judicial process. That is their legacy, and they have the audacity to bring an MPI here and say there's mismanagement of the migration system. The facts speak for themselves. It was this government in the past two years that had to clean up their mess. It was the Labor government that had to start all over again and create a new administrative review body, the Administrative Review Tribunal, the ART, which is more efficient, more transparent and most importantly more fair.

Those opposite are busy attacking this government about visitor visas. But, as we've heard, we have the same security checks that existed back then when they actually took in 1,991 people from Afghanistan and thousands of people from Iraq, Syria and the Palestinian territories. The same security checks exist today as did back then. In conclusion, the audacity of the opposition to raise an MPI around mismanagement means that they need to look back at their record and see exactly what it means to be mismanaging, to be neglectful, to be negligent and to underinvest, because they did all of that over a period of nine years. This portfolio is too important. It is too important to be securitised and politicised, because the public policy importance of social and economic elements of this portfolio are what makes a difference to this country—our immigration which we've been built on. (Time expired)

Alicia Payne (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In our parliament, we see the absolute best and worst of Australia, and today is no different. This morning I was really inspired to attend a parliamentary breakfast to celebrate the International Day of the Girl Child, which is an international day started by the UN to recognise the challenges faced by girl children around the world, particularly those living in poverty. This breakfast was organised by World Vision as part of their campaign of 1,000 voices for 1,000 girls, wanting Australians to sponsor 1,000 girl children. They've actually already met that target before the day, which is 11 October, so they're now aiming for 3,000.

I was particularly moved to hear from Akec Makur Chuot, who was the first African to be drafted into the AFLW. After a successful career in the AFL, she is now a commentator for Channel 7. Her sister, Ayor Makur Chuot, is a member of the WA Legislative Council and the first WA state MP of an African background. Akec was born in war-torn South Sudan in the same year that her father was killed there. She lived for 12 years in the Kakuma refugee camp in Kenya. It was inspiring to hear that coming to Australia as a refugee meant that she escaped a likely future of being married as a child, as one of her half sisters was. She also talked about how, as a girl, she wasn't able to play sports at all growing up there. But when she came to Australia she was able to pursue that through her school and ended up playing for the AFLW for four different clubs. Her story is like so many of refugees who have found their home in Australia. For us who have not experienced that journey, it really is hard to fathom what people like Akec have experience and what they have overcome in order to live their lives here.

Unfortunately, we also see the absolute worst in this place from those opposite, who are politicising something that should well be above this. I'm not surprised to see it, but I remain disappointed that there is no gutter that those opposite won't get down into and no issue that they will not exploit for political gain and to create division in our community. I'm disappointed to see that the misinformation about immigration continues to flow from those opposite, and I'm concerned that the alternative government of this country continues to weaponise a decision of the High Court of Australia and this issue of immigration. They are happy to pretend that they don't understand the separation of powers or our constitution and that our government is not taking immigration very seriously and doing the things that we should be doing. Now, as they continue to stoke fear around immigration and division, they are also saying that they do not trust our systems—systems that they want to be in government to run. They set tests for our government that they never would have passed when they were in government.

If you want to talk about incompetence when it comes to the home affairs portfolio, you don't need to look any further than the Leader of the Opposition when he was the Minister for Immigration and the member for Mitchell. During his tenure, the Leader of the Opposition released 1,300 criminals from immigration detention, including 102 convicted sex offenders, 64 of whom committed their offences against children. The Leader of the Opposition likes to talk tough on immigration, but on his watch we saw neglect of this important portfolio. The truth is that Australia has a long and proud history of humanitarian resettlement and that refugees from all around the world have made such an important contribution to building our nation, economy and communities as we know them today. The truth is that diversity is a strength and something that should be celebrated. Some of our most successful and respected citizens came as refugees fleeing war and persecution. These are people like Frank Lowy, Harry Triguboff, Anh Do, Les Murray and Dr Karl. Just today in the parliament, we've seen former Liberal Premier of Tasmania Peter Gutwein here. He has done a walk to shine a light on the contribution of migrants to our country. It will be interesting to know how his discussion goes with the Leader of the Opposition later today, when this federal opposition cannot recognise this and instead politicise it for— (Time expired)

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Canberra, nobody denies that there have been success stories of people who have come to this nation, people who have been granted humanitarian visas, people who have contributed mightily to our nation. But to say that we are politicising and weaponising this and that there's no gutter into which we won't stoop is I think a bridge too far. I think that is just putting the divisive nature of this whole topic where it doesn't need to go.

There is a front-page story in the Daily Telegraph today, and the heading is 'Who vetted his visa'—it needs a question mark, but we'll let that go through to the keeper. And Clare Armstrong, who is a very balanced journalist, has written an article with the kicker heading 'Coalition demands to know why this man was let in'. 'This man' is visual artist Fayez Al-Hassani. He has been granted a visa to Australia. He has previously hosted political members of Hamas and other terrorist organisations at his Gaza Art Institute, and he's had brothers and sons affiliated with the same violent groups. Three of his deceased brothers and two of his sons participated in groups designated as terror organisations by Australia or its allies. This man should be on the first plane out of here.

Today the immigration minister, the member for Watson, when the member for Wannon, the shadow immigration minister, was asking questions—of the Prime Minister, I might add, but answered by the minister; I appreciate that it is his portfolio—kept saying, 'Well, this is the department; this is our officials.' Yes, that is true, but Labor are the government, and this is on their watch. And it is not just the member for Wannon who is asking the questions. He is asking on behalf of the people of Australia.

Right at the end of question time there was an interjection—'running scared'—and there was this back and forth about running scared. I'll tell you who's running scared. It is not just that the Prime Minister, running away from the questions. The Australian public are very worried. The Australian public are very scared about their safety. Cast your mind back 2½ years. The question remains: are Australians better off now than they were 2½ years ago? Are Australians safer now than they were 2½ years ago? The answer to both questions is, unfortunately, a resounding 'no'. Australians are not better off, and Australians certainly don't feel safer.

I know that the member for Wills is a man of good intent, a man of good heart. He was Prime Minister Rudd's national principal, national security adviser. He's been put in a role as the special envoy for social cohesion. He's filled that position since July—and it's a big ask, a big demand on him. We should not need a special envoy for social cohesion, but, unfortunately, we've got types like this Fayez Al-Hassani, who has been let into the country wrongly, and he should be on the first plane out of here. But unfortunately it's the likes of him, and others who are now in this country—on visas granted on this government's watch—who are causing social disruption, social incohesion, and it is causing people to feel unsafe in their homes.

Why is it right that aged-care centres that have many Holocaust victims now have to put security in place? Why is it right that Jewish schools have to have armed guards protecting their children—our children, Australian children who were born here, who know no different? These children have lived the Australian lifestyle. They are Australians. Then we've got mongrels like this bloke who've come into this country and who should be on the first plane out of here but unfortunately are not. They've been let in by this government. They are causing social disruption. It is just wrong. The Australian people have had a gutful and are demanding to know: why is this so? Why is this the case? And Labor, the minister and the Prime Minister, cannot give those answers. They cannot provide the social cohesion that should be the first order of government.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am just going to remind people: I know the member for Riverina brings a lot of passion to this debate, but I do not need yelling in this chamber, or finger-pointing. So I'm going to give you the call, Member for Hawke, and I ask you to dial the volume down.

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. It's a message that should resonate throughout this debate more generally. The Leader of the Opposition is an angry and divisive politician, and this debate and the tone that he seeks to infect this debate with, within our communities, are absolutely emblematic of that anger and that divisiveness that he seeks for all Australians to be infected with, as we discuss these important issues. This is not a matter for petty politics, and it should not be the Leader of the Opposition's express intention to inflame concern within our community where it is not warranted.

Australia has a long and proud history of successful migration. Along with First Nations people here in our country, a huge number of our community are either migrants themselves or descended from migrants. Migration has yielded enormous social and economic benefits for our community and our country.

Australians, sadly, are used to seeing this: the Liberal Party speak very little about migration and they do very little to encourage and support sustainable migration while they are in government. But, as soon as they find themselves on the opposition benches, notwithstanding that many of the fundamental policy frameworks of Australia's migration program are effectively managed on a bipartisan basis, such that there aren't fundamental changes to our migration systems between governments—and I'll come to that in a moment because, unfortunately, the last government did a very poor job of maintaining that migration system, but nevertheless—they immediately switch gears. The Liberal Party switches gears—and the Leader of the Opposition himself is the spear-chucker for this approach—to incite anger and incite division within the Australian community, as they seek to drive the wedge of fear into our communities.

I represent one of the fastest-growing communities in our country, and migration is a key contributor to that growth. I can assure this House that my community values that migration very highly. It has brought enormous social and economic benefits to our community directly.

It is an attack on our community and on Australian values when the Leader of the Opposition stands up and seeks to undermine our national harmony and the social cohesion that underpins our success as a nation, in order to score his cheap political points at the expense of our broader migration program.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just a moment; I'm taking a point of order.

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Section 90, 'Reflection on Members':

All imputations of improper motives to a Member and all personal reflections on other Members shall be considered highly disorderly.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm aware of that standing order. I'm listening very carefully. He might have made some similar interjections earlier on. But I am listening. I've just made a statement to this parliament about having a more respectful debate. We've stopped the yelling and finger-pointing, and I will be listening to imputations as well.

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Labor government inherited a dysfunctional migration program. We can remember how the Leader of the Opposition self-styled himself as the Sheriff of Nottingham in his former role as home affairs minister—a ministry that he pulled together by using his political power within the government of the time. The reality is that he now seeks to undermine that social cohesion—those very fundamental Australian values of social cohesion and harmony across our communities—by politicising this debate. This is anger and division from the Leader of the Opposition, and our communities should rightly reject it.

Keith Wolahan (Menzies, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I listened carefully to all those who have spoken on both sides. They did speak with great passion. Those on the other side who spoke are some of the members that I hold in high regard and consider more than colleagues; some of them are friends. But when I listened to the contributions to this debate, I saw an example of how their deference to the discipline of the talking points of their party takes over. It's a formula that we see again and again. When an argument comes up that you don't like, you call it 'misinformation'. When it's a topic that you'd rather we not talk about, you attack the person and not the idea. You say, 'This is engaged in the wrong tone,' or it's 'an exercise in anger and division'. They don't even go to the topic. But this topic of competence in our immigration system is a fundamental one, because it goes to more than just our economy; it goes to who we are.

The last census told us a lot about who we are. It told us that more than 50 per cent of Australians have either one or two parents who were born overseas, or they themselves were. In electorates that are closer to the city, like mine, it's even higher. In my electorate, 70 per cent of people are first- or second-generation migrants. I am a migrant myself; I wasn't born here. I remember sitting with my dad—in fact, lying on a bed while it was raining—and he was telling me stories about his travels in the world. The place that he spoke most fondly of was Australia. He said that one day we might get to go there, and we did, because of the generosity of Australians then. That generosity was founded not just on a sense of compassion and self-interest—that's a given—but also on a belief that the system is run well. We can't have a generous and compassionate migration scheme if it's not run competently. Those two go together. So, when we stand up and have a matter of public importance and put to the government that the system is not being run competently, the government should take notice. If they don't, we may not have a generous, compassionate migration scheme going forward, because we must have public legitimacy behind it. In fact, it's the only thing that has ever backed it up.

We have a housing crisis at the moment. There is no silver bullet or lever that we can pull that will instantly solve it. There is one that comes close, and that is having a proportionate migration scheme. A proportionate migration scheme means that the numbers of people that come here are proportionate to our interests, what the economy needs and what our society can cope with at that time.

I come from the great city of Melbourne, and much of our migration system sees people go to that city because it is one of the world's great cities. I'm very proud of it, but it is struggling right now. It is struggling to build enough schools, enough hospitals and enough infrastructure. It's even struggling to keep clean. For those of you who land in Tullamarine, go down the Eastern Freeway; it is covered in graffiti and rubbish, and trees are cut down. It's not the city I remember. It's not at its best; it's unwell, because it's struggling to cope. When we ask this government whether they are running a migration scheme that is proportionate to our capacity to build all of the things that we need to preserve green space, the answer is no. When the government tries to address those questions, they engage in rhetorical devices and straw man devices. Australians deserve better than that. The government will resort to that old tactic that they use against this side all the time, which is to tear down the character of whoever is sitting in that chair for the Liberal Party. It's easier than engaging in the ideas. It's easier than actually doing the hard work and actually running a competent system that is in the national interest of this country and that Australians want and desperately deserve. Right now, our immigration system is broken. We are calling on the government to at least recognise it, to turn up here and have the debate, and to not just say, 'Well, what did you do in the last 10 years?' because we are well past that. This term is almost up, and it is time that this government showed up.

Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to thank the member for Menzies for not yelling and screaming like a lot of his idiot colleagues did—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You will withdraw that comment.

Luke Gosling (Solomon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Deputy Speaker; I withdraw. But many of his colleagues in their previous contributions did use, as you yourself reflected on, Deputy Speaker, incredible volume. I think not only the member for Wannon but others mistake volume and confected outrage for rational argument. I find it offensive, frankly, that at a time when the heads of our security agencies have called for calm and rational discussion, at a time when there are fractures in social cohesion because of significant issues happening, they are deliberately ramping up the volume, deliberately trying to increase the amount of anxiety in the community. I find that offensive. They should reflect on that confected outrage and have a good look at themselves.

I could provide a long speech. I could rant and rave like they did about the previous government's record of releasing 1,300 criminals from detention. I could go on for minutes and minutes about that. I could then go on to talk about how they were released without electronic monitoring, curfews or other conditions. There were no joint ABF or AFP operations to monitor those criminals that were released by those opposite under the Leader of the Opposition's watch. I could do that and speak for the rest of the speech on how badly they ran that process.

Instead I will focus on the Albanese government's positive achievements in the immigration portfolio and give some reflections from my part of the world. Its efforts to provide sanctuary for people fleeing war zones is particularly worth reflecting on: 1,200 Syrians and Iraqis were resettled in Australia as part of an increased dedicated intake under the humanitarian program; and almost 90 per cent of the 6,317 Afghan evacuees who arrived in Australia on a temporary humanitarian stay have transitioned to a permanent humanitarian visa. We are helping people getting out of war zones and, at the same time, supporting our national security organisations and ensuring that it is done well and effectively.

We are delivering a better planned migration system that works for the whole nation. We have heard from the previous speaker and others about how some of our major cities are under some stress when it comes to their infrastructure, but there is a lot more to our nation than just a couple of big cities; there is regional Australia. From my vantage point as the member for Darwin and Palmerston in the Northern Territory, and in particular in my new role as Special Envoy for Defence, Veterans' Affairs and Northern Australia, I know the integral role that the North is playing in Australia's future. A properly balanced migration system and a better planned migration system is about the important issue for our whole nation of growing the north of our country by transitioning to net zero, developing our critical minerals industry and implementing the government's National Defence Strategy, with $14 billion to $18 billion spent on upgrading bases across northern Australia to ensure our proper preparations for the defence of our nation but also our role with allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific.

For Territory businesses, our migration strategy means skilled workers to make our Top End more productive. We need people in health care, people in the digital economy and people to help in the net zero transition to becoming the renewable energy superpower that we can be. On the weekend, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government and I opened a new campus for Charles Darwin University in the city of Darwin. We're going to welcome more international students into the Territory but we understand that we need to make sure that overall immigration is better planned, and that's what our government is doing.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. The time for discussion has now concluded. In accordance with the resolution agreed by the House on 11 September 2024 and varied on 9 October 2024, I call on members' statements.